(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Esmeralda-Southern Nye planning area: Tonopah Resource Area record of decision"

BLM LIBRARY 



88065441 



LI 



0UFEAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

150 COOLWATER LANE 

BARSTOW, CA 92311 




ESMERALDA - SOUTHERN NYE 

RECORD OF DECISION 
Planning Area A 



% 

O 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

Las Vegas District, Las Vegas, Nevada 

Battle Mountain District, Battle Mountain, Nevada 



L_ 



f I lip D i I .-■■ \ 



ilREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 
150 COOLWATER LANE 
BARSTQW.CA 92311 ,, 



J. u q O D u» 5 -t *# j 



5 




IN REPLY REFER TO: 



United States Department of the Interior 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 
NEVADA STATE OFFICE 



.U5U5 



850 Harvard Way 

P.O. Box 12000 

Reno, Nevada 89520 






OCT 10 1986 



1617 
(NV-060) 



Dear Reader: 

Enclosed for your information is a copy of the Record of Decision (ROD) for 
Planning Area A of the Esmeralda -Southern Nye Resource Management Plan (RMP). 
This ROD is the approval of the Esmeral da-Southern Nye RMP and it completes 
the process which included the development of draft and final management plans 
and associated environmental impact statements (EISs). All of the planning 
documents are available for review by the public at the Battle Mountain, 
Nevada, BLM District Office and Tonopah, Nevada, Resource Area Office. 

Part I of the ROD displays the management prescriptions to be implemented as a 
part of the planning process. The Management Prescription Summary, Part II, 
provides a detailed summary of the prescriptions which includes objectives, 
management guidance and implementation strategies for the management plan. 
This ROD also reflects changes suggested by the public and those which 
occurred as a result of internal review. 

The wilderness recommendations made in the RMP are only preliminary. This is 
because only the Congress can designate areas as wilderness. Since this is 
the case, a separate legislative wilderness EIS is being prepared which will 
be filed with the Secretary of the Interior. The Secretary is required by the 
Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) to make his wilderness 
recommendations to the President by 1991. Prior to this date he will ensure 
that mineral surveys are conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey and the 
Bureau of Mines on all areas recommended as suitable for wilderness 
designation. After receiving the Secretary's recommendations, the President 
has two years to forward his recommendations on to the Congress. 



A Range! and Program Summary (RPS) will be issued 
months. This document will outline the implemen 
management program and will inform interested pe 
decisions for the Southern Nye County portion of 
The RPS will explain the process of established 
of livestock grazing use. It will identify alio 
outline the range improvement program needed to 
will also outline the monitoring program upon wh 
use will be evaluated. Periodic updates of the 
range! and management program is implemented. 



during the next twelve 
tation of the rangeland 
rsons of rangeland planning 

the Tonopah Resource Area, 
initial and subsequent levels 
tment specific objectives and 
meet these objectives. It 
ich each allotment's grazing 
RPS will be issued as the 



\ 



L 



The next phase of the RMP/EIS process is the implementation phase. Grazing 
allotment management plans (AMPs), wildlife habitat management plans (HMPs) 
and wild horse herd management area plans (HMAPs) will be developed. Once 
these plans are developed and approved, work will commence on the ground. 

Please be aware that the planning process does not end with the ROD. One of 
the requirements of BLM planning is a review process to determine whether the 
plan is still current and the objectives are being met. The Esmeral da-Southern 
Nye RMP shall be reviewed on a minimum of five year intervals for adequacy. 
As a result of the review process, this plan may be updated. This will be 
done through a public process. The Battle Mountain BLM District Office should 
always be consulted if questions arise concerning this management plan. 

We wish to express our appreciation to all those who participated in the 
development of the Esmeral da -Southern Nye RMP. Quality planning is dependent 
on the active participation of private citizens. We look forward to your 
continued assistance in our planning and other land management activities. 

Sincerely yours, 




Edward F. Sj 
State Director, 



ESMERALDA-SOUTHERN NYE PLANNING AREA 
TONOPAH RESOURCE AREA 

RECORD OF DECISION 



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

BATTLE MOUNTAIN DISTRICT OFFICE 

BATTLE MOUNTAIN, NEVADA 

1986 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 

SECTION PAGE 

PART I - Record of Decision 

A. .j J. IN J. XvLJ-L/ U O -L XL/IN a ooooooooocooooooooooooooo»»*«»»ooe X 

B. MANAGEMENT PRESCRIPTIONS 3 

1. » Wl lUCL I 1«300 OOOOOOOOOOODOOOO«OC«COOOOOOOOOOOO J 

2. Land Tenure and Utility Corridors 3 

3 . Rangeland Management 3 

C. RATIONALE FOR RMP DECISIONS.............. 5 

D. SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES 5 

E. MITIGATING MEASURES 6 

PART II - MANAGEMENT DECISIONS SUMMARY 

FOREST RESOURCES 7 

LAND TENURE 9 

LIVESTOCK GRAZING (RANGELAND MANAGEMENT) 12 

MINERALS AND ENERGY 18 

RECREATION . 20 

SOIL, WATER AND AIR 23 

UTILITY CORRIDORS. 25 

WILDERNESS 27 

WILD HORSES AND BURROS (RANGELAND MANAGEMENT) 30 

WILDLIFE HABITAT (RANGELAND MANAGEMENT) 33 

MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE FOR NON-DECISION RESOURCES 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 37 

THREATENED, ENDANGERED AND SENSITIVE SPECIES....... 37 

VISUAL RESOURCES 37 

PLAN AMENDMENTS. 38 

PROTEST PROCEDURES 38 

PLAN MONITORING. 38 

RANGELAND PROGRAM SUMMARY 38 



PART I 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Esmeralda-Southern Nye Resource Management Plan 



Tonopah Resource Area 
Tonopah, Nevada 



INTRODUCTION 



The proposed Esmeralda-Southern Nye Resource Management Plan (RMP) and Final 
Environmental Impacts Statement (FEIS) is approved. 

The RMP provides for management of 3.4 million acres of public land, in south 
central Nevada (see Location Map). Of this total area, the 2,689,230 acres 
within the Tonopah Resource Area, Battle Mountain District is referred to as 
Planning Area A. The remaining 735,547 acres within the Statelme Resource 
Area, Las Vegas District is referred to as Planning Area B. This Record of 
Decision (ROD) covers Planning Area A. A seperate ROD for Planning Area B has 
been prepared concurrently with this document. 

The management prescriptions in this ROD are a result of Bureau planning 
efforts initiated in March 1983 which culminated in the Draft 
Esmeralda-Southern Nye RMP and Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), 
the resulting public response and input to the draft document and the Proposed 
Esmeralda-Southern Nye RMP and Final EIS dated October 4, 1985. Major 
decisions are listed in Part I. Part II, the Management Decision Summary, 
provides a detailed summary of the RMP decisions which include objectives, 
management prescriptions, management guidance and implementation strategies. 

The Fish Lake Valley allotment was not analyzed in the RMP although it is in 
the planning area. This allotment, which contains 702 acres in Nevada and 699 
acres in California, was analyzed in the California Desert Conservation Area 
(CDCA) Plan. Management objectives of this allotment were identified in the 
CDCA Plan. 

In addition, past Esmeralda and Stateline Management Framework Plan (MFP) Step 
3 decisions and associated environmental assessments regarding minerals and 
energy, forest resources, recreation and soil, water and air resources 
unaltered by this plan remain in effect until changed by a subsequent planning 
action and are displayed in Part II. Decisions are identified by planning 
document for each decision resource. See Location Map for delineation of the 
Esmeralda and Stateline MFP Area boundaries. 



-1- 



R42E 
T3N 




m Patented Lands 



NONE 



NONE 



National Forest 
National Monument 
US Fish and Wildlife 



Bureau of Land Management 

ESMERALDA-SOUTHERN NYE 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Planning Area A 

LOCATION MAP 



1986 



B. MANAGEMENT PRESCRIPTIONS 



Issue 



Wilderness 



Land Tenure and Utility 
Corridors 



Management Prescriptions 

Preliminarily recommend a central core area 
of the Silver Peak Range Wilderness Study 
Area, totalling 17,850 acres, as suitable 
for wilderness designation. 

Preliminarily recommend the Grapevine 
Mountains, Pigeon Spring and Queer Mountain 
Wilderness Study Areas and a portion of the 
Silver Peak Range Wilderness Study Area, 
totalling 169,159 acres, as nonsuitable for 
wilderness designation. 

Identify a pool of 47,749 acres of 
public land for disposal during the life of 
this plan. This land would meet 
urban-suburban expansion or agricultural 
development needs for communities in the RMP 
area. Disposal of identified public lands 
would also enhance BLM management of 
residual lands by creating a 
blocked-ownership pattern in the RMP area. 

Designate 296 miles of utility corridors 
which include existing facilities and/or 
rights-of-way. No private land will be 
included in these corridors. 

Identify 30 miles of planning corridors. No 
private land will be included in these 
corridors. 



Rangeland Management 



Authorize livestock use up to active grazing 
preference. However, it is anticipated not 
to exceed the three to five year average of 
45,444 animal unit months (AUMs) . 



Close the Emigrant Peak Allotment to 
livestock grazing. 



Intensively manage five Improve category 
allotments, the Silver Peak, Ice House, 
Mag ruder Mountain, Red Springs and Montezuma 
allotments. Provide range improvements for 
three Maintain category allotments, the 
Monte Cristo, White Wolf and Razorback 
allotments. Other range improvements may be 
implemented if private funds are made 
available. 



Construct 42.2 miles of fence; drill 7 
wells; install 22.25 miles of pipelines; 
develop 5 springs; install 15 troughs; 
install 2 cattle guards; burn, seed and/or 
spray 1,195 acres; install gabions (numbers 
not yet determined). 

Manage wild horses and burros at current 
numbers based on the 1982 survey which 
identified a level of 1102 wild horses and 
335 wild burros in 10 herd areas. 

Develop six springs to enhance management of 
four herd areas. Implement herd management 
area plans in the following herd management 
areas: Bullfrog, Dunlap, Fish Lake Valley, 
Goldfield, Gold Mountain, Montezuma, 
Palmettos, Paymaster/Lone Mountain, Silver 
Peak and Stonewall. 

Continue existing rangeland monitoring 
studies, and establish new studies as 
recommended by the 1984 Nevada Rangeland 
Monitoring Handbook. The studies are to 
determine if management objectives are being 
reached and what adjustments, if any, in 
livestock use, wild horse and burro numbers 
and wildlife reasonable numbers are 
necessary. 

Manage current wildlife habitat initially 
for current numbers with a goal of achieving 
reasonable numbers in both current and 
historical habitat in the following habitat 
areas: Stonewall, Monte Cristo, Bare 
Mountain, Lone Mountain, Amargosa, 
Magruder/Palmetto, Montezuma, Goldfield, 
Gold Mountain, Sawtooth and White 
Mountains. Construct 4 spring developments 
and 3 small catchments to support 
implementation of habitat management plans. 

Continue the implementation of the Silver 
Peak Habitat Management Plan (HMP). 

Support reintroduction of bighorn sheep into 
historic habitat areas in the Amargosa, 
Goldfield, Magruder/Palmetto, Monte Cristo, 
Montezuma, Silver Peak and Sawtooth habitat 
areas . 



-4- 



Support introduction of bighorn sheep into 
suitable habitat in the Bare Mountain and 
Gold Mountain habitat areas. 

Implement special management treatment 
and/or facilities along 4.8 miles of streams 
to improve aquatic and riparian habitat 
condition (see Wildlife Habitat -Mule Deer 
map) . 

C. RATIONALE FOR RMP DECISIONS 

This proposed plan provides for protecting fragile and unique resource 
values, such as riparian and stream habitat, while not overly restricting 
the ability of the other resources to provide for the production of 
commodity values on the public lands. This plan is a realistic and 
practical combination of the best management prescriptions from the 
alternatives analyzed in the DEIS. This plan provides a workable 
framework for responsible future management of pubic lands and resources 
in the Esmeralda Planning Area of" the Tonopah Resource Area that is 
responsive to public input; in conformance with current legislation, 
regulations and policy; and consistent with the principles of multiple-use 
and sustained-yeild. This plan proposed to do this in . . . 

"a manner that will protect the quality of scientific, scenic, 
historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmosphere, water 
resources and archaeological values." (FLPMA, Sec. 102(a)(7) and (8)). 

Alternative C, the environmentally preferred alternative in the DEIS, was 
not chosen as the proposed plan as adverse social and economic impacts 
analyzed in this alternative are not acceptable. 

D. SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES 

The five alternatives presented in the Esmeralda-Southern Nye RMP are 
briefly summarized below. All of the alternatives were multiple-use 
oriented, but each emphasized a different balance between resources. 

No Action Alternative 

This alternative presents a continuation of present management direction 
with no wilderness. The purpose of this alternative is to provide a 
baseline for comparison of other alternatives. 

Alternative A 

This alternative emphasizes livestock production, wildlife numbers, land 
disposals, and utility and planning corridor designations. It 
de-emphasizes wilderness values and reduces wild horse and burro numbers. 



-5- 



Alternative B 

This alternative emphasizes wild horse and burro use, wildlife numbers and 
wilderness values. It provides a "mid-range" approach toward land 
disposal and utility and planning corridors and de-emphasizes livestock 
grazing. 

Alternative C 

This alternative represents the elimination of livestock grazing on public 
lands and maximizes wildlife numbers and acreage recommended for 
wilderness. It also identifies minimum land disposal and corridor 
designations and reduces wild horse and burro numbers. 

Preferred Alternative 

This alternative strives to balance competing demands by providing for 
production of needed goods and services, while protecting important 
environmental values. 

E. MITIGATING MEASURES 

No specific mitigating measures were identified. Any adverse 
environmental impacts will be minimized through the use of management 
guidance presented in Part II of this document. Those measures will be 
strictly enforced during implementation. The effects of implementing the 
decisions outlined in this document will be monitored and evaluated to 
assure that the desired results are being achieved. Plan monitoring and 
evaluation procedures are also presented in the proposed RMP. 



Date 




Edward F. Spang, 
State Director, Nevada 



-6- 



PART II 
MANAGEMENT DECISIONS SUMMARY 



FOREST RESOURCES 
ESMERALDA MFP 
Objectives 

1. Permit sustained yield harvesting of woodland products and, where 
economically and environmentally feasible, make efforts to increase the 
allowable sustained yield. 

2. Maintain a continuing program of forest products inventory for all areas 
where harvesting is being permitted within the planning unit. 

Management Prescriptions 

1. Manage the woodland resource for sustained yield of Christmas trees, 
juniper posts, pinyon nuts, and firewood throughout the planning area. 
Encourage the public to use the areas shown on the Forest Resource Map for 
the harvest of the first three of these products. Firewood will be 
harvested from dead or down trees, two greenwood cutting areas in the 
Palmetto Mountain and Silver Peak Range, and in areas that are to be 
cleared (see Forest Resources Map). Only existing roads, washes, and 
trails will be used to obtain woodland products. Public purpose uses of 
woodland products will be permitted to the extent that resource values are 
not impaired. 

2. Maintain the sustained production of Joshua trees from the Magruder 
Mountain Joshua Tree Harvest Area (see Forest Resources Map). 

3. Exclude commercial sales of live vegetative material except in areas to be 
treated as part of the watershed program. Permits may be granted for 
removal of vegetative products in other areas for scientific or 
educational purposes as appropriate. 

IMPLEMENTATION 

Stipulations will be attached to all permits issued for the two greenwood 
areas to accomplish protection of forest and other resources and fire 
protection. 



-7- 



n 



R371/2E/ % 






/ \ 


\R39E 
5\T6N 




' l . -r fj 


i \ 




5 \ 


- - i \ 

1 ir 


\ RdOE 


v-y- 


1 \ 


\T5N 




DESIGNATED HARVEST AREAS 

1 Silver Peak greenwood area 

2 Palmetto greenwood area 

3 Magruder Mountain Joshua tree harvest area 



Bureau of Land Management 

ESMERALDA-SOUTHERN NYE 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Planning Area A 

FOREST RESOURCES 



1986 



LAND TENURE 



ESMERALDA-SO. NYE RMP 



Objectives 

1. To improve opportunities for economic development by substantially 
increasing the amount of non-Federally owned land within the planning area. 

2. To improve the manageability of public lands by disposing of scattered 
isolated tracts of land and creating a blocked ownership pattern. 

Management Prescriptions 

Identify a pool of 47,749 acres of public land for disposal during the life 
of this plan (see Land Tenure and Utility Corridors map). These areas are 
specified in the following table: 

LAND DISPOSAL BY AREA 



AREA 



COUNTY 



ACRES 



Beatty 

Blair Junction 

Coaldale 

Fish Lake Valley 

Goldfield 

Goldpoint 

Lida 

Millers 

Scotty's Junction 

Silver Peak 

Tonopah 



Nye 


10,726 


Esmeralda 


690 


Esmeralda 


530 


Esmeralda 


20,885 


Esmeralda 


2,674 


Esmeralda 


1,540 


Esmeralda 


570 


Esmeralda 


2,720 


Nye 


3,660 


Esmeralda 


1,080 


Esmeralda 


2,674 


Total 


47,749 



MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE 

All lands identified for disposal must meet one or more of the criteria 
outlined in Section 203(a) of FLPMA. Site-specific decisions regarding land 
ownership adjustments in the planning area will be made based largely on 
consideration of the following criteria through the land report/environmental 
analysis process. This criteria list is not considered all-inclusive but 
represents the major factors to be evaluated. 

1. Public resource values or concerns, including but not limited to: 
threatened, endangered or sensitive species habitat; riparian areas; flood 
plains and wetlands; fisheries; nesting/breeding habitat for game birds or 
animals; key big game seasonal habitat; wild horse and burro habitat; 
developed recreation and recreation access sites; municipal watersheds; 
energy and mineral potential; visual resources; cultural resources; 
cultural resource sites eligible for inclusion on the National Register of 
Historic Places; wilderness and areas being studied for wilderness; and 
other statutory-authorized designations. 



-9- 




NONE 



NONE 



Planning Corridors 
Utility Corridors 
Land Disposal 
Patented Lands 
National Forest 
National Monument 
US Fish and Wildlife 



Bureau of Land Management 

ESMERALDA-SOUTHERN NYE 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Planning Area A 

LAND DISPOSAL AND CORRIDORS 



1986 



2. Accessibility of the land for public uses. 

3. Amount of public investments in facilities or improvements (i.e., range 
improvements, wildlife projects, etc.) and the potential for recovering 
those investments. 

4. Difficulty or cost of administration (manageability). 

5. Significance of the decision in stabilizing business, social and economic 
conditions, and/or lifestyles. 

6. Encumbrances or conflicts of record; consistency of the decision with 
cooperative agreements and plans or policies of other agencies. 

7. Suitability and need for change in land ownership or use for purposes 
including but not limited to community expansion, such as industrial, 
residential or agricultural (other than grazing) development. 

IMPLEMENTATION 

All land disposal actions identified in this plan are discretionary. Land 
disposals will be accomplished primarily through one of the following 
methods: sales, Recreation and Public Purposes Act requests, exchanges or 
agricultural entry. Disposal of these parcels will be made with perimeters 
established in coordination with the appropriate government entity and will be 
accomplished by the most appropriate disposal authority. 



-11- 



LIVESTOCK GRAZING (RANGELAND MANAGEMENT) 

ESMERALDA -SO. NYE RMP 

Objectives 

1. Improve the condition of public rangelands to enhance the productivity for 
all rangeland values. 

2. Initially, authorize livestock use at existing levels. 

3. Maintain or improve selected riparian and stream habitat to good or better 
condition. 

Management Prescriptions 

1. Authorize livestock use up to active grazing preference. However, it is 
anticipated not to exceed the three to five year average of 45,444 AUM's. 
The Emigrant Peak Allotment will be closed to livestock grazing. 

2. Continue the existing rangeland monitoring studies, and establish new 
studies as necessary, as recommended by the Nevada Rangeland Monitoring 
Handbook, to determine if management objectives are being reached and what 
adjustments in livestock use, if any, are necessary. 

3. Implement intensive grazing management plans on the five Category n I" 
allotments. Complete implementation of the existing stewardship program 
on the Monte Cristo Allotment, and provide range improvements on the three 
Category "M" allotments (see Allotment Boundaries and Categories map). 
Priorities are as follows: 

Category 

I/I 
I 
I 

I 
M 
M 
M 

a/ Intensive Management will consider these 2 allotments as one 
grazing unit under present grazing lessee. In case of the transfer 
of either grazing lease, Silver Peak will retain its place in the 
list, Ice House will become fifth on the list. 

b/ Implementation of existing stewardship program. 

4. Construct the following projects needed in support of the above plans: 

a. Drill seven water wells in areas where there are no other available 
sources of water. The additional water would be made available to 
livestock, wildlife, and wild horses and burros to encourage more even 
utilization of the vegetation. 



-12- 



Priori 


ty 


Allotment 


1 




Silver Peak/Ice House a/ 


2 




Magruder Mountain 


3 




Red Springs 


4 




Montezuma 


5 




Monte Cristo b/ 


6 




White Wolf 


7 




Razor Back 




ALLOTMENT 

1 Monte Cristo 

2 Red Springs 

3 Emigrant Peak 

4 Icehouse 

5 Silver Peak 

6 White Wolf 

7 White Sage 

8 Silver King 

9 Sheep Mountain 

10 Montezuma 

11 Yellow Hills 

12 Magruder Mountain 

13 Springdale #2 

14 Razorback 

15 Fish Lake Valley 



SELECTIVE MANAGEMENT 
CATEGORIES 

M 

I 
N/A 



Bureau of Land Management 

ESMERALDA-SOUTHERN NYE 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Planning Area A 

GRAZING ALLOTMENTS 
SELECTIVE MANAGEMENT CATEGORIES 

1986 



b. Develop five springs to promote better livestock distribution for more 
even utilization. Included with these developments will be the 
installation of 22.25 miles of pipeline and fifteen drinking troughs. 

c. Construct 42.2 miles of fence to enhance livestock distribution and 
management. This action will encourage even utilization of the 
vegetation. This will include the installation of two cattleguards. 

d. Manipulate 1,195 acres of vegetation by burning, seeding, and/or 
spraying to increase available forage for livestock, wildlife and wild 
horses and burros, and to improve water infiltration and holding 
capacity of the soil. These areas will be fenced and excluded from 
grazing to allow establishment of the seeded species. 

MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE 

1. It is BLM policy to address rangeland management problems through a 
selective management approach. The BLM has developed three categories 
into which allotments will be grouped according to their resource needs 
and potential for improvement. The names and objectives of the three 
categories are: 1) (M) maintain the current satisfactory condition; 2) 
(I) improve the current unsatisfactory condition; and 3) (C) manage in a 
custodial fashion. 

Management priority will be given to "I" (Improve) category allotments 
first, "M" (Maintain) category allotments second and "C" (Custodial) 
category allotments third in accordance with the Bureau's selective 
rangeland management policy. Categories may be changed in the future if 
an evaluation shows changed conditions. The present categories are based 
on several criteria. These are: an estimate of present range condition; 
an analysis of resource potential; the presence of user conflicts; the 
opportunity for positive returns; and present management. 

2. Development of range improvement projects will include the following: 

a. Environmental analysis will be conducted during project planning so 
that, depending on impacts, modification or abandonment of the project 
may be decided. 

b. Cultural resource clearance will be obtained prior to construction, 
and modifications will be made if cultural resources are found during 
construction. 

c. Benefit/Cost (B/C) analysis will be performed on improvements required 
to implement new AMPs and other activity plans subsequent to the EIS. 
Such improvements will be analyzed on an allotment basis. The B/C 
analysis will be performed in compliance with BLM policy. 

d. Only minimal clearing of vegetation will be allowed on project sites 
requiring excavation. 

e. All disturbed areas will be rehabilitated to replace ground cover and 
prevent erosion where such action is necessary and practical. 



-14- 



f. Alteration of sagebrush areas either through application of 
herbicides, prescribed burning, or by mechanical means will be in 
accordance with procedures specified in the Memorandum of 
Understanding between the Nevada Department of Wildlife and the Bureau 
of Land Management relating to the Western States Sage Grouse 
Guidelines. 

g. Active raptor nests adjacent to areas proposed for vegetation 
manipulation will be protected. On-the-ground work will be confined 
to the period preceding nesting activity or after the young have 
fledged (left the nest). Areas containing suitable nesting habitat 
will be inventoried for active raptor nests prior to initiation of any 
project. 

h. Soils inventories will be completed prior to planning vegetation type 
conversions to determine land treatment feasibility. 



i. 



Fire management plans will be developed before any prescribed burning 
occurs on any native vegetation. 



j. Fence construction must comply with BLM Manual 1737 and NSO Manual 
Supplement 4730. Lay-down fences will be constructed in wildlife and 
wild horse areas if necessary and feasible. Fences in wild horse 
areas will contrast enough with surroundings so as to be visible to 
horses and will have gates installed at least once every mile and at 
all corners. 

k. Spring sources will be fenced and water provided for livestock and/or 
wild horses and burros away from the source when a spring is 
developed. This will prevent overgrazing and trampling of adjacent 
vegetation and provide escape areas for small wildlife. 

1. Water will be made available in allotments and rested pastures for 
wild horses and burros and wildlife, wherever feasible. 

m. Water improvements will include bird ramps in watering troughs and 

where the need is identified for wildlife use, drinkers along 

pipelines, overflows at troughs and protected seep areas will be 
installed. 

n. Maintenance of structural improvements shall be provided by the user 
deriving the primary benefit from the improvement, through cooperative 
agreements and as specified in the BLM's 1983 Rangeland Improvement 
Policy. 

IMPLEMENTATION 

1. The implementation of intensive grazing management will be accomplished 
through livestock grazing allotment management plans (AMPs). Allotments 
in the "I™ category are given first piority for development of plans to 
resolve identified problems. Least priority is assigned to "C" category 
allotments . 



-15- 



AMPs will be tailored to meet objectives already identified in Appendix C 
of the Draft Esmeralda-So. Nye RMP. These plans will be multiple-use in 
nature and coordinated with wildlife habitat management plans (HMPs) and 
wild horse and burro herd management area plans (HMAPs). They will be 
developed in consultation and coordination with land users, with the 
preferred method being coordinated resource management and planning 
(CRMP). Key components of AMPs are management objectives, grazing 
systems, range improvements and monitoring studies. Grazing systems will 
be included in these AMPs. Systems will include grazing treatments 
designed to improve rangeland condition by manipulating livestock grazing 
to accomplish the objectives of management. The deferment of grazing or 
complete rest from grazing during the critical growth period of key 
management species allows these species to maintain and/or increase their 
density, percent composition, vigor, production and reproduction. Where 
intensive grazing management systems are implemented, utilization levels 
may be exceeded during each grazing cycle. The periodic rest from grazing 
would allow the key management species to increase in vigor and production. 

Movement of livestock in "I" allotments, without interior pasture fences, 
would be controlled by manipulating water sources. This would be done in 
a manner which achieves the grazing use prescribed in the following 
treatments. 

Treatment 1 - Graze livestock yearlong or seasonlong for livestock 
production. 

Yearlong or season-long grazing will be used as a treatment in combination 
with either a deferred treatment or a rest treatment of those "I" 
allotments which warrent a grazing system. Under this system, only a 
portion of the total allotment would be grazed. The remainder of the 
allotment would be undergoing either a rest treatment or a deferred 
treatment. In the case of those allotments where yearlong grazing is 
allowed, it is important to note that under this system that portion 
grazed yearlong in the first year would be under either a deferred or rest 
treatment the second year. Thus during any given year, only a portion of 
the allotment would be grazed. This would be accomplished by either 
fencing an allotment into smaller grazing units, or by controlling the 
available water sources. 

Treatment 2 - Rest from livestock grazing one year or grazing season to 
provide for vigor of key management species. 

Treatment 3 - Defer livestock grazing until after seedripe of key 
management species to promote reproduction. 

2. Livestock use adjustments in the class of livestock, the season of use, 
the stocking rate or the pattern of grazing (including implementation of a 
grazing system) will be implemented through documented mutual agreements 
or by decision. Necessary adjustments will be identified by consulting 
the livestock operator, reviewing range survey data and monitoring study 
data. 



-16- 



When adjustments are made through mutual agreements, they may be 
implemented once the rangeland program summary has been through a public 
review period. When livestock use adjustments are implemented by 
decision, they will be done in accordance with 43 CFR 4160. 

3. Range improvements will be implemented to achieve specific resource 
management objectives. Although range improvements are not proposed on 
low priority allotments (category C) in this RMP, some minor rangeland 
improvements may be developed as the need arises or if private funds 
become available. These projects may be constructed only if their impacts 
do not exceed those analyzed in the RMP. Projects other than those 
identified in Appendix K of the draft RMP may be identified during 
consultation/coordination . 

4. Monitoring studies will be used to make adjustments in livestock grazing 
and to evaluate the effectiveness of any new grazing practices in meeting 
the allotment objectives. Monitoring studies will incorporate approved 
methods contained in the 1984 Nevada Rangeland Monitoring Handbook, the 
Bureau Technical Guides 4400-1, 2, 3, 4, & 7, Nevada Grazing Management 
Manual Supplement H-4120-1, and the Nevada Wildlife Manual Supplement 6630 
and Fisheries Supplements 6670 (USDI, BLM) . Vegetation monitoring will 
include, but? not be limited to, utilization studies, actual use data 
collection, ecological status, frequency trend studies and climatic data 
collection. Monitoring will be of low intensity on "C" allotments. For 
the "I" and "M" category allotments, monitoring intensity will be 
variable, focusing on the effects of management prescriptions on 
objectives outlined in appendix C of the Draft RMP and any other 
objectives developed through consultation and coordination with interested 
parties and AMP development. 



-17- 



MINERALS AND ENERGY 



ESMERALDA MFP 



Objectives 

To make available for use and encourage the development of mineral and 
energy resources to meet national, regional and local needs, consistent 
with declared national objectives for an adequate supply of minerals at 
reasonable market prices. 

Management Prescriptions 

1. Assure that mineral leasing operations — exploration, development and 
extraction — are carried out with minimum environmental and other damage by 
placing appropriate stipulations (conditions) in permits. Provide for the 
rehabilitation of lands affected by such operations to minimize 
environmental degradation. 

2. Leave the entire planning area open to mineral entry under the mining laws 
unless previously withdrawn. 

3. Develop detailed mineral resource data for areas where resource uses 
conflict so that multiple use problems can be resolved in favor of the 
best use of the land. 

4. Facilitate exploration for diatomite, clay, talc minerals, and flourite. 

5. Facilitate geothermal energy and oil and gas exploration and development. 

MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE 

All public land is open to mineral entry and development unless previously 
withdrawn. In 1982, all mineral withdrawals and segregations in the RMP were 
reviewed to determine if they were still necessary for their intended 
purpose. The following displays a breakdown of existing withdrawals and 
Classification and Multiple Use (CMU) Act segregations and their status: 



NAME/NUMBER LOCATION SIZE (acres) STATUS 

Pinyon-Joshua T. 3 S., R. 38 E., MDM 640 Recommended 
Transition Section 32, all for revocation 

Research Natural Area, 
PLO 3530 
(withdrawal) 

All public land is open to geothermal, oil and gas leasing with no special 
stipulations except in bighorn sheep habitat areas . In these areas, lease 
applications are processed on a case-by-case basis to evaluate if there is a 
need for special stipulations. 



-18- 



IMPLEMENTATION 

Mineral exploration and development on public land will be regulated under 43 
CFR 3800 to prevent unnecessary and undue degredation of the land. Validity 
examinations may be requested under the following conditions: 

1. Where a mineral patent application has been filed and a field examination 
is required to verify the validity of the claims(s). 

2. When there is a conflict with a disposal application or where the statute 
authorizing the disposal requires clearance of any encumbrances. 



-19- 



RECREATION 
ESMERALDA MFP 
Objectives 

1. Provide appropriate forms of protection, public access and user facilities 
to identified scenic, botanic, zoologic, geologic, historic and 
archaeologic values to assure they are not lost, destroyed, substantially 
altered, or managed in such a way that they are inaccessible. 

2. Provide appropriate forms of protection, public access and user facilities 
to areas which have been identified as possessing high primitive values. 

3. Provide off-road vehicle use areas for both competitive and 
non-competitive use by individuals and organized groups. 

4. Provide for general recreational use of the national resource lands. 
Improvements in the quality and quantity of available experience should be 
made where possible. 

Management Prescriptions 

1. Protect the scenic qualities of Grapevine Mountain, Big Moly, West Lida 
Summit, Upper Lida Canyon, South Fish Lake Valley, Rhyolite Canyon, Nivloc 
Area, and North Fish Lake Valley by excluding any development on public 
lands which will detract from these qualities. This decision does not 
restrict mineral entries in the area. (See Recreation and ORV Designation 
map. ) 

2. Maintain visual qualities at their present high scenic levels on State 
Highway 374 between Beatty and Death Valley National Monument, State 
Highway 276 between Scotty's Junction and Death Valley National Monument, 
State Highway 266 between Lida Junction and the California border, State 
Highway 265 between Blair Junction and Silverpeak, and State Highway 264 
between U.S. 6 and the California border. 

3. Manage the Goldfield Joshua Tree forest to insure its continued presence 
and vigor. Harvest of the trees will be restricted to those uses 
identified with mining, scientific, educational, or public purpose needs. 
Aesthetic degradation will be eliminated by including appropriate 
stipulations in all permits issued for this area. 

4. Protect the Sump, Rhyolite Canyon, and the Piper Peak Banded Formation 
from activities which would degrade their high geological sightseeing 
values by appropriate stipulations in permits issued for these areas. 

5. Manage "The Crater" near Silverpeak for its scenic quality. Sale or free 
use permits will not be issued for the cinders found there. 

6. Designate Big Moly an Outstanding Natural Area, and develop facilities for 
viewing the scenic values. This decision does not place restrictions on 
mining locatable minerals. 



-20- 



7. Maintain access to all rock and mineral collecting areas on public lands 
within the planning area. 

8. All public lands will be open for off -road vehicle recreation with the 
following exceptions: (see Recreation and ORV Designation map) 

Closed 

Pinyon-Joshua Tree Transition Research Natural Area, 10 acres. 

Limited 

a. Goldfield Joshua Tree Forest, 100,000 acres (competitive events 
limited to existing roads, trails and washes). 

b. Pinyon-Joshua Tree Transition Research Natural Area, 550 acres (closed 
to competitive events and other vehicles are restricted to existing 
roads, trails and washes) . 

c. The Sump, 160 acres (closed to competitive events with other vehicles 
restricted to existing roads, trails and washes). 

d. Amargosa speckled dace and Amargosa toad habitat, 55 acres 
(competitive events limited to existing roads, trails and washes). 

e. Fragile watershed areas, 803,846 acres (competitive events will be 
limited to existing roads, trails and washes). 

MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE 

Applications for commercial or competitive special recreation use permits in 
areas designated as open will be analyzed through the special recreation use 
permit/environmental assessment process to determine what impacts may occur. 
These potential impacts will then be weighed against resource values to 
determine whether or not the special recreation use permit will be authorized. 

IMPLEMENTATION 

Off-road vehicle designation will be implemented in accordance with Executive 
Orders 11644 (Use of Off-Road Vehicles on Public Lands) and 11989 (Off-Road 
Vehicles on Public Lands), and guidance contained in BLM Manuals 8340, 8341 
and 8342. 



-21- 




SCENIC AREAS Q 

1 Big Moly 

2 Grapevine Mountains 

3 Nivlock Area 

4 North Fish Lake Valley 

5 Piper Peak Banded Formation 

6 Rhyolite Canyon 

7 South Fish Lake Valley 

8 The Crater 

9 The Sump 

10 West Lida Summit-Upper Lida Canyon 

1 1 Goldf ield Joshua Tree Forest 



SCENIC HIGHWAYS 



ORV DESIGNATION 

* Pinyon Joshua Transition Research Natural Area: 

10 acres closed; 550 acres closed to competitive events, 
other ORV use restricted to existing roads, trails and washes. 



Closed to competitive events 

Other ORV use restricted to existing roads 

trails and washes 



SZZA 



Competitive events limited to existing roads, 
trails, courses and washes 



Bureau of Land Management 

ESMERALDA-SOUTHERN NYE 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Planning Area A 

RECREATION AND OFF-ROAD VEHICLE 
(ORV) DESIGNATION 



1986 



SOIL, WATER AND AIR 
ESMERALDA MFP 
Objectives 

1. Maintain current high water quality areas and improve water quality in the 
area to meet County, State and Federal water quality standards. 

2. Maintain or improve air quality to meet County, State and Federal 
standards. 

3. Minimize the threat of flood and sediment damage in populated areas of the 
planning units, both on and off the public lands. 

4. Maintain current watershed conditions where improvement is not feasible. 
Management Prescriptions 

1. Construct small-scale water control facilities such as water bars or 
diversion dikes to protect the Amargosa River drainage. 

2. Maintain natural conditions in the remainder of the planning area by 
excluding uses which would reduce existing ground cover, increase present 
erosion activity or impair present water quality and yield. 

3. Establish water quality studies where necessary. 
MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE 

1. Soils will be managed to maintain or improve rangeland productivity as 
well as minimizing present and potential wind and water erosion. 

2. The Bureau, under the mandates of Sections 208 and 313 of the Clean Water 
Act of 1977, Executive Order No. 12088, and the provisions of the Federal 
Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 is required to comply with the 
State of Nevada's water quality management and implementation plan. 
Bureau commitments and responsibility are further emphasized by the 
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by the Nevada State Director and 
the Division of Environmental Protection (DEP) of the Nevada Department of 
Conservation and Natural Resources. Among other things, the Bureau has 
agreed to: 1) Continue to develop a pollution control and abatement 
program which provides for both environmental protection and reasonable 
resource uses on BLM-administered lands; 2) Wherever appropriate, to 
institute best management practices and employ other necessary plans and 
permit requirements in the development of management framework plans, 
allotment management plans, grazing permits, etc., for the abatement and 
control of nonpoint source pollution from public lands; and 3) Develop and 
institute "208" water quality monitoring and surveys on an as-needed basis 
and, upon request, provide DEP with any available water quality data 
gathered by BLM. 

3. Management activities in riparian zones will be designed to maintain or, 
where possible, improve riparian habitat condition. 



-23- 



4. Air quality will be protected as all BLM and BLM-authorized activities 
must prevent air quality deterioration beyond the established standards 
specified in the Nevada Ambient Air Quality Standards. The Federal Land 
Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) specifies the protection of air 
and atmospheric quality on BLM lands in Sec. 202(c)(8). FLPMA also 
requires an active role in preventing air quality violations on BLM land 
in Sec. 102(c)(8). The Clean Air Act of 1977 has specified requirements 
for Federal land managers to protect the air over lands under their 
jurisdiction. 

IMPLEMENTATION 

Soil, water and air resources will continue to be evaluated on a case-by-case 
basis as part of project level planning. Such evaluation will consider the 
significance of the proposed project and the sensitivity of the soil, water 
and air resources in the affected area. Stipulations will be attached, as 
appropriate, to ensure compatibility of projects with soil, water and air 
resource management. 



-24- 



UTILITY CORRIDORS 

ESMERALDA-SO. NYE RMP 

Objectives 

To ensure a system for transmission of utilities through the planning area by 
establishing corridors which will meet the long-range planning needs for 
utility companies and avoid sensitive resource values. 

Management Prescriptions 

1. Designate 296 miles of utility corridors which include existing facilities 
and/or rights-of-way (see Land Tenure and Corridors Map). No private land 
would be included in these corridors. 

A. A-B-C-D-E-F, a designated corridor running north-south which includes 
existing facilities and/or rights-of-way held by Western Area Power 
Administration (WAPA) for a 750 KV D.C. line. 

B. B-O-N and O-M, a designated corridor running east-west. This corridor 
provides the only major east-west route in the planning area and would 
provide an outlet for potential geothermal power which may be produced 
in Fish Lake Valley. 

C. L-W-O, a designated corridor running east-west containing an existing 
facility. It serves as the major link between Millers and Fort 
Churchill substations. 

D. M-S-D and E-K-G, designated corridors running north-south along U.S. 
95 that contain existing facilities not included in the WAPA 
right-of-way corridor. 

E. M-R, a designated corridor generally running north-south between 
Tonopah and Alkali substations. 

2. Identify 30 miles of planning corridors (see Land Disposal and Corridors 
Map) . 

A. Z-Y, a planning corridor running north-south from lone Valley and 
providing a route from Austin, Nevada. 

B. P-B, a planning corridor running east-west which provides for the 
logical extension of corridor B-O-N and O-M. This corridor provides 
the only major east-west route in the planning area and would provide 
an outlet for potential geothermal power which may be produced in Fish 
Lake Valley. 

MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE 

Utility corridors will be identified following BLM procedures and will be made 
on a point-to-point basis. The actual route will be established after 
environmental analysis is completed on each right-of-way application. 
Designated corridors will be three miles wide, except where topographic 
constraints exist. 



-25- 



Designated corridors are those which contain existing transmission facilities 
and/or rights-of-way. Where transmission facilities and/or rights-of-way 
exist, the width of the corridor will encompass the existing right-of-way and 
be located to avoid sensitive resources. Future right-of-way applications 
will be required to locate new facilities in proximity to existing facilities, 
except where considerations of construction feasibility, cost, resource 
protection or safety are overriding. 

IMPLEMENTATION 

The designation of rights-of-way corridors is iucended to minimize the 
proliferation of dispersed rights-of-way by indicating the Bureau's preferred 
location. Designation does not mean that future rights-of-way are restricted 
to corridors, nor is it a commitment by the Bureau to approve all right-of-way 
applications within corridors — a corridor is not a withdrawal. 

Corridor management involves encouraging prospective applications to locate 
within corridors. This may limit other activities which are not compatible 
with right-of-way use within corridors. Land disposals within the corridor 
will be analyzed for their impact on future right-of-way activities. 



-26- 



WILDERNESS 

ESMERALDA-SO. NYE RMP 
Objectives 

1. To preliminarily recommend wilderness designation for those wilderness 
study areas (WSAs) where the values of wilderness designation are capable 
of balancing the other resource values and uses which would be foregone 
due to wilderness designation. 

2. To preliminarily recommend wilderness designation only for those 
wilderness study areas that can be effectively managed as wilderness over 
the long term. 

Preliminary Management Prescriptions Recommended 

1. Preliminarily recommend 17,850 acres of the Silver Peak Range Wilderness 
Study Area (WSA) as suitable for wilderness designation (see Wilderness 
Study Area Recommendations map) . 

2. Preliminarily recommend all 66,800 acres within the Grapevine Mountains 
WSA, all 3,575 acres within the Pigeon Springs WSA, all 81,550 acres 
within the Queer Mountain WSA and 17,234 acres within the Silver Peak 
Range WSA as nonsuitable for wilderness designation. 





TABLE 
WILDERNESS STUDY 


AREAS 




WSA 


Suitable Acres 
(Preliminary) 




Nonsuitable Acres 
(Preliminary) 


Silver Peak Range 


17,850 a/ 






17,234 


Grapevine Mountains 









66,800 


Queer Mountain 









81,550 


Pigeon Spring 
Total 



17,850 






3,575 
169,159 



a/ Includes 1,184 acres added to the Silver Peak Range WSA to enhance 
manageabi 1 i ty . 

MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE 

1. Each wilderness study area will be managed under the "Interim Management 
Policy and Guidelines for Lands Under Wilderness Review" to preserve its 
wilderness characteristics until Congress officially designates it as 
wilderness and includes it in the National Wilderness Preservation System, 
or it is officially removed from further wilderness consideration. After 
designation as wilderness by Congress, each wilderness area will be 
managed in conformance with the Bureau of Land Management Wilderness 
Management Policy. 



-27- 






approximate miles 




Recommended suitable 



WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS 
060-338 Silver Peak Range 
060-350 Pigeon Spring 
060-354 Queer Mountain 
060-355 Grapevine Mountain 



Bureau of Land Management 

ESMERALDA-SOUTHERN NYE 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Planning Area A 

WILDERNESS STUDY AREA 
RECOMMENDATIONS 



1986 



2. Mineral resource survey reports will be prepared by the Geological Survey 
and Bureau of Mines on all areas with a preliminary recommendation as 
suitable for wilderness designation. The mineral resources survey will 
become part of the information used by the Secretary of the Interior in 
making the final recommendations on wilderness suitability. 

IMPLEMENTATION 

All wilderness study areas and the Pinyon Joshua Research Natural Area 
(Instant Study Area) will continue to be protected under the Bureau's "Interim 
Management Policy and Guidelines for Land Under Wilderness Review" . Mining 
activities will be also managed under the 3802 regulations. Wilderness 
recommendations made in the final environmental impact statement for the 
resource management plan are preliminary and subject to change during 
administrative review. A separate final legislative environmental impact 
statement will be prepared for the wilderness study recommendations. A 
wilderness study report has been written that addresses each area 
individually. After review of these documents, the Director of the Bureau of 
Land Management will request mineral surveys by the Geological Survey and 
Bureau of Mines for each area recommended as preliminarily suitable. The 
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 requires the Secretary of the 
Interior to review areas of the public lands determined to have wilderness 
characteristics, and to report to the President by October 21, 1991, his 
recommendations as to the suitability or nonsuitablity of each such area for 
preservation as wilderness. The President is required to report his 
recommendations to Congress by October 21, 1993. Areas designated as 
wilderness by Congress will be managed under the Bureau's Wilderness 
Management Policy. Areas designated as wilderness will be designated "closed" 
to off -road vehicles under the authority of Executive Order Nos. 11644 and 
11989 and the Wilderness Act of 1964, except if such use takes place as part 
of a valid existing right or if authorized in the wilderness management plan 
for the area. 

Separate management plans tailored to the characteristics of each area would 
be developed through consultation with interested parties. They would be 
coordinated with other activity plans for their areas. Specific management 
objectives, requirements and decisions implementing administrative practices 
and visitor activities would be developed in each plan. . Designated wilderness 
areas would be segregated against appropriation and operations under the 
mining laws, mineral leasing laws and other mineral disposal authorities 
subject to valid existing rights. Designation would allow for continuation of 
livestock grazing permits. 



-29- 



WILD HORSES AND BURROS (RANGELAND MANAGEMENT) 

ESMERALDA-SO. NYE RMP 

Objectives 

1. To improve the condition of public rangelands to enhance the productivity 
for all rangeland values. 

2. Initially, manage wild horses and burros at current numbers and maintain 
their habitat in areas which constituted their habitat at the time the 
Wild and Free Roaming Horse and Burro Act became law in 1971. 

3. To maintain or improve selected riparian and steam habitat to good or 
better condition. 

Management Prescriptions 

1. Initially manage wild horse and burro populations at current numbers based 
on the 1982 survey which identified a level of 1102 horses and 335 burros 
in 10 herd management areas (see Wild Horse and Burro Herd Management 
Areas Map). The breakdown is as follows: 



HERD AREA 


HORSES/BURROS 


Bullfrog 


12/218 


Dunlap 


69H 


Fish Lake Valley 


62/12 


Goldfield 


227/71 


Gold Mountain 


19H 


Montezuma 


161H 


Palmettos 


184H 


Paymaster /Lone Mountain 


48H 


Silver Peak 


307H 


Stonewall 


13/34 



TOTAL 1102/335 

Develop and implement 10 herd management plans in the following priority: 

Priority Herd Area 

1 Silver Peak 

2 Stonewall 

3 Bullfrog 

4 Palmettos 

5 Montezuma 

6 Goldfield 

7 Paymaster/Lone Mountain 

8 Gold Mountain 

9 Dunlap 

10 Fish Lake Valley 



-30- 




\R39E 
\T6N 




HERD MANAGEMENT PLAN AREAS 

1 Dunlap (H) 

2 Lone Mountain/Paymaster (H) 

3 Fish Lake Valley (H & B) 

4 Silver Peak (H) 

5 Montezuma Peak (H) 

6 Goldfield (H & B) 

7 Palmetto (H) 

8 Stonewall (H & B) 

9 Gold Mountain (H) 
10 Bullfrog (H & B) 



Herd Management Areas 



Bureau of Land Management 

ESMERALDA-SOUTHERN NYE 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Planning Area A 

WILD HORSE AND BURRO 
HERD MANAGEMENT AREAS 

PROPOSED HERD MANAGEMENT AREA PLANS 

1986 



3. Continue existing rangeland monitoring studies and establish new studies 
in these herd management areas as recommended by the Nevada Rangeland 
Monitoring Handbook to determine if management objectives are being 
reached and what adjustments, if any, in wild horse and burro numbers are 
necessary. 

MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE 

1. Environmental assessments will be prepared prior to any gatherings and in 
the development of herd management area plans and will be made available 
to interested and affected individuals and organizations. 

2. Section 4 of the Wild Horse and Burro Protection Act (1971) requires that 
wild horses or burros which stray from public lands onto privately-owned 
lands be removed upon request from the landowners. 

3. Fences in wild horse herd management areas will be located to minimize 
interference with the normal distribution and movement of wild horses in 
accordance with Nevada BLM 4730 Manual Supplement. Selected portions of 
new fences constructed in these areas will be flagged or otherwise marked 
for one year after construction to make them more visible to horses. 

4. Wild horse gathering procedures will be designed so that captured animals 
are handled in a safe and humane manner, loss of captured animals due to 
traumatic injury is limited to less than two percent, and roundups do not 
occur within six weeks before and after the peak foaling season. 

5. Water for wild horses and burros will be made available in allotments 
used for livestock. 

IMPLEMENTATION 

Wild horse and burro management will be guided by herd management area plans 
(HMAPs). These plans will be developed through consultation and coordination 
with interested parties and will be coordinated with livestock and wildlife 
plans and other resource plans. They will focus on wild horse and burro 
management through population and habitat monitoring studies. 



-32- 



WILDLIFE HABITAT (RANGELAND MANAGEMENT) 

ESMERALDA-SO. NYE RMP 

Objectives 

1. Improve the condition of public rangelands to enhance the productivity 
for all rangeland values. 

2. Initially manage wildlife habitat for existing numbers of big game while 
recognizing reasonable numbers of wildlife as a management goal. 

3. Maintain or improve selected riparian and stream habitat to good or 
better condition. 

Management Prescriptions 

1. Manage current wildlife habitat initially for current wildlife numbers 
with a goal of achieving reasonable numbers of wildlife in both current 
and historical habitat (see Wildlife Habitat maps). Habitat Management 
plans will be developed and/or implemented in the following wildlife 
habitat areas and order of priority: 



1. 


Silver Peak 


2. 


Stonewall 


3. 


Monte Cristo 


4. 


Bare Mountain 


5. 


Lone Mountain 


6. 


Amargosa 


7, 


Magruder/Palmetto 


8. 


Montezuma 


9. 


Goldfield 


10. 


Gold Mountain 


11. 


Sawtooth 


12. 


White Mountains 



2. Continue existing rangeland monitoring studies and establish new studies 
as recommended by the Nevada Rangeland Monitoring Handbook to determine if 
management objectives are being reached and what adjustments, if any, in 
wildlife reasonable numbers are necessary. 

3. Support the reintroduction of bighorn sheep into historic habitat areas in 
the Goldfield, Amargosa, Magruder/Palmetto, Monte Cristo, Montezuma, 
Silver Peak and Sawtooth habitat areas. 

4. Support the introduction of bighorn sheep into suitable habitat in the 
Bare Mountain and Gold Mountain habitat areas. 

5. Implement special management treatment and/or facilities along 4.8 miles 
of streams to improve aquatic and riparian habitat conditions (see 
Wildlife Habitat-Mule Deer map) . 

6. Construct 4 spring developments and 8 small catchments in support of 
implementing habitat management plans. 



-33- 



R4ZE 
T3N 




HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN AREAS 

1 Monte Cristo 

2 Silver Peak 

3 Lone Mountain/Paymaster 

4 Magruder/Palmetto 

5 Montezuma 

6 Goldfield 

7 Stonewall 

8 Gold Mountain 

9 Amargosa 

10 Sawtooth Mountain 

11 Bare Mountain 12 White Mountain 

DISTRIBUTION 

Current 



Historical 
Potential 



Bureau of Land Management 

ESMERALDA-SOUTHERN NYE 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Planning Area A 

WILDLIFE HABITAT - BIGHORN SHEEP 
HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN AREAS 



1986 




HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN AREAS 

1 Monte Cristo 

2 Lone Mountain 

3 Silver Peak/Palmetto 

4 Magruder/Sylvania 

5 Montezuma 

6 Stonewall 

7 Gold Mountain 

8 Amargosa 9 White Mountain 



NONE 



Mule Deer 



Elk 



• Special management treatments 

and/or facilities to improve aquatic 
and riparian habitat condition 



Bureau of Land Management 

ESMERALDA-SOUTHERN NYE 

RECORD OF DECISION 

Planning Area A 

WILDLIFE HABITAT - MULE DEER AND ELK 

HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN AREAS 



1986 



MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE 

1. All management guidance applicable to construction of projects, as 
described in the "Livestock Grazing" section, will apply to suitable 
projects constructed specifically for wildlife. 

2. Time-of-day and/or time-of-year restrictions will be placed on 
construction activities associated with transmission and utility 
facilities, leasable and salable mineral exploration and/or development 
that are in the immediate vicinity of or would cross desert bighorn sheep 
lambing areas, crucial sage grouse, bighorn sheep, deer and desert 
tortoise habitat or raptor nesting areas. 

IMPLEMENTATION 

The development of HMPs will be closely coordinated with livestock, wild horse 
and other resource plans, where appropriate. Wildlife HMPs will address four 
major themes: management of crucial habitats to provide habitat for 
threatened, endangered or sensitive species where present; management of big 
game ranges to provide habitat for reasonable numbers of wildlife over the 
long term; improvement of riparian, wetland and aquatic habitats; management 
of other habitats to meet the needs of upland and non-game animals. 

Riparian and aquatic habitat improvement measures could include managing 
livestock through grazing systems consistent with maintaining riparian 
vegetation in optimum condition, pasture fencing, or fencing areas to exclude 
livestock and wild horses and burros. Whether to use protective fencing, 
grazing systems, some other appropriate measure, or a combination of methods 
will be determined on an individual basis for each riparian area. 



-36- 



MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE FOR NON-DECISION RESOURCES 



CULTURAL RESOURCES 



Cultural resource protection is required through Section 106 of the National 
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Section 2(b) of Executive Order 11593, 
and Section 101 (b)(4) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 
1969. Prior to project approval, intensive field (Class III) inventories 
will be conducted in specific areas that would be impacted by implementing 
activities. If cultural or paleontological sites are found, every effort 
will be made to avoid adverse impacts. However, in the case of National 
Register quality sites where avoidance of adverse impacts is not possible, 
BLM will consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer and the 
Advisory Council on the Historic Preservation in accordance with the 
Programmatic Memorandum of Agreement between BLM and the Council dated 
January 14, 1980. This agreement sets forth a procedure for developing 
appropriate mitigative measures to lessen the impact of adverse affects. 
Finally, the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 (92 Stat. 469 or 
P.L. 95-341) defines the special status for sacred places, artifacts, plants 
and animals of Native American people in the United States. This law 
guarantees American Indians access to sacred sites, including cemeteries and 
natural species and resources required in their religion, even though these 
resources may no longer be controlled by the Indian people. 

THREATENED, ENDANGERED AND SENSITIVE SPECIES 

No activities will be permitted in habitat for threatened, endangered or 
sensitive species that would jeopardize the continued existence of such 
species. Whenever possible, management actions in habitat for threatened, 
endangered or sensitive species will be designed to benefit these species 
through habitat improvement. All project work will require a threatened, 
endangered or sensitive species clearance before implementation. 
Consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service per Section 7 of the 
Endangered Species Act is necessary if threatened, endangered or proposed 
threatened or endangered species or its habitat may be impacted. Other 
species considered sensitive but not under the protection of the Act are 
given special management consideration by Bureau policy. If adverse impacts 
to these other sensitive species are identified during project planning, the 
project will be modified to avoid these impacts. 

VISUAL RESOURCES 

Visual resources will continue to be evaluated as part of the environmental 
analysis process for activity and project plans and other proposed actions. 
Such evaluation will consider the significance of the proposed project and 
the visual sensitivity of the affected area. Stipulations will be attached 
as appropriate to assure that the visual integrity of the area remains 
intact and that visual resource management objectives are met. 

A visual resource inventory will be prepared and maintained for all public 
lands within the planning area. 



-37- 



PLAN AMENDMENTS 

The RMP may be amended when there is a need to consider monitoring and 
evaluation findings, new data, new or revised policy, a change in the scope of 
resource uses or a change in the terms, conditions and decisions of the 
approved plan. Amendments may be made through such processes as environmental 
assessments or environmental impact statements. 

PROTEST PROCEDURES 

Any person who participated in the planning process and has an interest which 
is or may be adversely affected by the approval or amendment of a resource 
management plan may protest such approval or amendment. A protest may raise 
only those issues which were submitted for the record during the planning 
process (43 Code of Federal Regulations 1610.5-2(a) ) . 

PLAN MONITORING 

Monitoring will include not only the vegetation monitoring described in the 
livestock, wildlife and wild horse and burro sections, but also monitoring of 
the RMP itself. At intervals not to exceed five years, the management actions 
will be analyzed for consistency with plans adopted by local, state and other 
federal agencies and Indian tribes. New data will be analyzed to determine 
its significance to the plan. 

This plan shall be reviewed on a minimum of five year intervals to determine 
whether it is still current and whether objectives are being met. This plan 
will also be monitored for consistency with state and local plans as well as 
adjoining BLM or other Federal agency plans. 

RANGELAND PROGRAM SUMMARY 

The Rangeland Program Summary (RPS) will describe the allotment specific 
objectives and management actions planned for livestock, wild horses and 
burros, and wildlife. It will also discuss the monitoring and range 
improvement projects needed to meet these allotment objectives. Updates of 
the RPS will explain and update monitoring efforts and results. This document 
will be issued subsequent to the Record of Decision. 



-38- 687-057/45863 



UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 



Las Vegas District Office 

P.O. Box 26569 
Las Vegas, Nevada 89126 



OFFICIAL BUSINESS 

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300 




POSTAGE AND FEES PAID 

U.S. DEPARTMENT 

OF THE INTERIOR 

INT 415